Our Gun Laws Don't Care If You Might Be a Terrorist:
Look, the Rude Pundit knows that the Tsarnaevs didn't get their guns from the shop at the corner or the Wal-Mart. But let's try a thought experiment.

Wrap your head around this: Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev, aka "The Dead One," was on the terrorist watch list (or, you know, one of the super-secret watch lists), and that fact alone wouldn't have stopped him at all from legally buying any gun he wanted. It wouldn't have even slowed him down. You can be forced to leap through hoops and have your anus probed in order to board a plane. But being on the list that's supposed to, you know, give us the illusion of safety cannot, by law, be used to even slow someone down if he or she wants an AR-15.

The Rude Pundit thinks the watch list is bullshit and a violation of at least three constitutional protections, but, hell, it exists and it affects nearly half a million people, hindering them in various ways. Not if you want a semi-automatic rifle with a large magazine, though. Again, think about it, particularly if you're a gun owner: Tamerlan Tsarnaev could have walked into a gun store. He would have had to pass a background check, but that background check could not take into consideration that he was on the goddamn terrorist watch list. Nothing could happen because of that. No extra phone call to authorities. He would have been treated like anyone else. What might have hindered him was his domestic violence incident and that he was denied citizenship. But not for being on the terrorist watch list. And, you know, at a gun show? Fuck, go for it. (Wanna bet we find out that that's where he got his guns?)

You want a fact? Here ya go: "Data from the Government Accountability Office show that between 2004 and 2010, people on terrorism watch lists tried to buy guns and explosives more than 1,400 times. They succeeded in more than 90 percent of those cases, or 1,321 times." Are you cool with this, average gun owner?

Simply put, if you support the idea of a terrorist watch list, if you support the idea of monitoring people who you think might one day attack the United States, but you don't think they should receive extra scrutiny when purchasing a fucking gun or a bunch of fucking guns and bullets, then you are, at best, a pathetic tool of the NRA; at worst, you're aiding and abetting violence against Americans. No matter what, you are the worst kind of motherfucker: the kind who fucks his own mother and is proud of it. Let's just call you "Lindsey Graham" for short.

On Sunday in Seattle, five people were shot dead after a domestic dispute. Today, in an Illinois town of less than 300, five people were shot dead.

In Boston, yes, many were injured and property was damaged. But so far only three people have died. The media is filled with articles and reports introspective and knee-jerk about What Could We Have Done to prevent the bombing or What Can We Do to prevent future attacks. None of those ideas involve preventing people from having access easy access to weapons and explosives (you know, gunpowder?).

No, the Seattle and Manchester, IL murderers are not analogous to Tamerlan Tsarnaev. But they each killed more people. And we're not going to have a single discussion about how to stop those kinds of mass killings because, like in our national failure to do anything after Newtown, the right answers are off the table.